
.3 



011 899 091 2 



pHSJ 



J <\ 1 \ 



E 384 
.3 

.129 
Copy 1 



COMMUNICATION 



FROM THE 



/^ ,'g> 



EXECUTIVE OF ILLINOIS, 



TO THE 



GOVERNOR OF MARYLAND, 



ENCLOSING 



J'UE EXECUTIVE MESSAGE OF THAT STATE. &C. 







ym^"^ 



ANNAPOLIS: 

J. HUGHE*, PRINTIEK. 
1833. 






.X ^j 



COMMUNICATION, &c. 



State of Illinois, Executive Department, 
Vandalia, 29th Dec. 1832. 
To His Excellency, 

The Governor of the State of Maryland, 
Sir: — I enclose to you a copy of the President's Pro- 
clamation, and the Resolutions of the General Assembly of 
this State thereon, together with a Message of the Execu- 
tive of the State. 

I have the honor to be, 
Your obt. servt. 

JOHN REYNOLDS. 



MESSAGE. 



EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT, > 
Vandalia, Dec. 24th, 1S32. \ 
Fellow- Citizens of the Senate, 

and House of Representatives: 

Since I had the honor to transmit to this General As- 
sembly, my late message, in which allusion is made to the 
dangers resulting from the doctrine then advocated, and 
now practised upon by the State of South Carolina, I have 
seen and read, the ordinance promulgated by that State, 
in which is exhibited in frightful colours the awful tenden- 
cy, of those doctrines. 

In the view in which it presents itself to my mind, I can 
regard it in no other light, than as a treasonable attempt 
to dismember this happy confederac}'. In the same view, 
must it be regarded by all those, who admit the supremacy 
of the laws, revere the Constitution, or love the Union. 

Since your last adjournment, I have received the procla- 
mation of the President of the United States, which ac- 
companies this message giving at large his views of the or- 
dinance, and making a fervent appeal to the patriotism of 
the people to stand by the Constitution, and sustain him in 
all legal measures to enforce the execution of the laws and 
preserve the Union. 

The appeal of our venerated chief magistrate, w^hose 
firmness and patriotism, have been manifested, as well in 
the field of battle, as through a long, and eventful life of 
the most tiying emergencies, will not, I am assured, be in 
vam; but that, we will as one man, be ready to meet the 
crisis, which is too certainly approaching, and abide with 
him in the shock. 

In the further discharge of my Constitutional duty, I 
would respectfully recommend the adoption of some resolu- 
tion expressive of the sense of the people of this State, on 
th(? matters herewi'di submitted: and in that mode, or in 
some such as your wisdom may dictate, give the strongest 
assurances of the assent of the people to the views present- 
ed by the President, and of their firm and unalterable de- 
termination to sustain him at all hazards, and through all 
dangers to the final issue of the controversy. 

JOHN REYNOLDS. 



PROCLAMATION, 
BY ANDREW JACKSOj^, 

PRESWEJVT OF THE UJMTED STATES, 

Whereas, a Convention assembled in the State of South 
Carolina, have passed an Ordinance, by which they declare 
"That the several acts and parts of acts of the Congress of 
the United States, purporting to be laws for the imposing 
of duties and imposts on the importation of foreign com- 
modities, and now having actual operation and effect with- 
in the United States, and more especially" two acts for the 
same purposes, passed on the 28th of May, 1828, and on 
the 14th of July, 1832, "are unauthorized by the Constitu- 
tion of the United States, and violate the true meaning and 
intent thereof, and are null ajid void, and no law," nor 
binding on the citizens of that State or its officers : and by 
the said Ordinance it is further declared to be unlawful for 
any of the constituted authorities of the State or of the 
United States, to enforce the payment of the duties imposed 
by the said acts within the same State, and that it is the 
duty of the Legislature to pass such laws as may be ne- 
cessary to give full effect to the said Ordinance: 

Jlnd, W/iereas, by the Ordinance it is further ordained, 
that, in no case of law or equity, tlecided in the courts of 
said State, wherein shall be drawn in question the validity 
of the said Ordinance, or the acts of the Legislature that 
may be passed to give it effect, or of the said laws of the 
United States, no appeal shall be allowed to the Supreme 
Court of the United States, nor shall any copy of the record 
be permitted or allowed for that purpose : and that any per- 
son attempting to take such appeal shall be punished as 
for a contempt of court: 

And, finally the said Ordinance declares that the people 
South Carolina will .maintain the said Ordinance at eveiy 
hazard; and that they will consider the passage of an act 
by Congress abolishing or closing the ports of the said 
State or otherwise obstructing the free ingress or egress of 
vessels to and from the said port, or any other act of the 
Federal Government to coerce the State, shut up her ports, 
destroy or harrass her commerce, or to enforce said acta 
otherwise than through the civil tribunals of the country, as 



Cy 

inconsistent with the longer continimnGe of South Carolina 
in the Union; and that the people of the said State will 
thenceforth hold themselves absolved from all further obli- 
gation to maintain or preserve their political connexion 
with the people of the other states, and will forthwith pro- 
ceed to organize a separate Government, and do all other 
acts and things which sovereign and independent States 
may of right do. 

^nd Whereas, the said Ordinance prescribes to the 
people of South Carolina a course of conduct in di- 
rect violation of their duty as citizens of the United 
States, contrary to the laws of their country, subversive 
of its constitution, and having for its object the destruc- 
tion of the Union — that Union, which, coeval with 
our political existence, led our fathers, without any other 
ties to unite them than those of patriotism and a common 
cause, through a sanguinary struggle, to a glorious inde- 
pendence — that sacred Union, hitherto inviolate, which per- 
fected by our happy constitution has brought us, by the 
favor of Heaven, to a state of prosperity at home, and high 
consideration abroad, rarely, if ever, equalled in the histo- 
try of nations. To preserve this bond of our political exis- 
tence from destruction, to maintain inviolate this state of 
naional honor and prosperity, and to justify the confidence 
my fellow citizens have reposed in me. I Andrew Jack- 
son, President of the United States, have thought 
proper to issue this my PROCLAMATION, stating my 
views of the Constitution and laws applicable to the mea- 
sures adopted by the Convention of South Carolina and 
the reasons they have put forth to sustain them, declaring 
the course which duty will require me to pursue, and ap- 
pealing to the understanding and patriotism of the people, 
warn them of the consequences that must inevitably result 
from an observance of the dictates of the Convention. 

Strict duty would require of me nothing more than the 
exercise of those powers with which I now, or may hereaf- 
ter be invested, for preserving the peace of the Union and 
for the execution of the laws. But the imposing aspect 
which opposition has assumed in this case, by clothing 
itself with state authority, and the deep interest which the 
people of the United States must all feel in preventing a 
resort to stronger measures, while there is hope that any 
thing will be yielded to reasoning and remonstrance, per- 
haps demand, and will certainly justify a full exposition to 
South Carolina and the nation, of the views I entertain of 
this important question, as well as a distinct enunciation 



of the course which my sense of tluty will require me to 
pursue. 

This Ordinance is founded, not on the indefeasible right 
of resisting acts which are plainly unconstitutional, and too 
oppressive to be endured, but on the strange position that 
any one State may not only declare an act of Congress 
void, but prohibit its execution — that they may do this 
consistently with the Constitution — that the true construc- 
tion of that instrument permits a State to retain its place in 
the Union, and yet to be bound by no other of its laws than 
those it may choose to consider as constitutionai. It is 
true, they add, that to justify this abrogation of a law, it 
must be palpably contray to the Constitution; but it is evident, 
to give the right of resisting laws of that description, cou- 
pled with the uncontrolled right to decide what laws de- 
serve that character, is to give the power of resisting all 
laws. For, as by theory there is no appeal, the reasons 
alledged by the State, good or bad, must prevail. If it 
should be said that public opinion is a sufficient check 
against the abuse of this power, it may be asked why it is 
not deemed a sufficient guard against the passage of an 
unconstitutiapal act by Congress? There is, however, a 
restraint infhis last case, which makes the assumed power 
of a State more indefeasible, and which does not exist in 
the other. There are two appeals from an unconstitution- 
al act passed by Congress — one to the Judiciary, the other to 
the people and the States. There is no appeal from the 
State decision in theory, and the practical illustration 
shows that the Courts are closed against an application to 
review it, both judges and jurors being sworn to decide in 
its favor. But reasoning on this subject is superfluous 
when our social compact in express terms declares, that 
the laws of the United States, its Constitution, and treaties 
made under it, are the supreme law of the land; and for 
greater caution, adds, "that the Juclges in every State shall 
be bound thereby, any thing in the Constitution or laws of 
any State to the contrary notwithstanding." And it may 
be asserted, without fear of refutation, that no Federative 
Government could exist without a similar provision. Look 
for a moment to the consequence. 

If South Carolina considers the revenue laws unconsti- 
tutional, and has a right to prevent their execution in the 
port of Charleston, there would be a clear constitutional 
objection to their collection in every other port, and no 
revenue could be collected any v/here; for all imposts must 



be equal. It is no answer to repeat that an unconslitutiona 
law is no la^y, so long as the question of its lej^aHty is to be 
decided by the State itself; for every law operating inju- 
riously upon any local interest will be perhaps thought, and 
certainly represented, as unconstitutional, and as has been 
shown, there is no appeal. 

If this doctrine had been established at an earlier day, 
the Union would have been dissolved in its infancy. The 
excise law in Pennsylvania, the embargo and non-inter- 
course law in the Eastern States, the carriage tax in Vir- 
ginia, were all deemed unconstitutional, and were more un- 
equal in their operation than any of the laws now complained 
of; but, fortunately, none of those States discovered that 
they had the right now claimed by South Carolina. The 
w^ar into which we were forced, to support the dignity of the 
nation and the rights of f ur citizens, might have ended in de- 
feat and disgrace, instead of victory and honor, if the States, 
who supposed it a ruinous and unconstitutional measure, 
had thought they possessed theright oi nullifying the act by 
which it was declared, and denying supplies for its prose- 
cution. Hardly and unequally as these measures bore upon 
several members of the Union, to the legislature of none 
did this efficient and peaceble remedy, as it is called, sug- 
gest itself. The discovery of this important feature in our 
constitution was reserved to the present day. To the 
statesmen of South Carolina belongs the invention, and 
upon the citizens of that State will unfortunately fall the evils 
of reducing it to practice. 

If the doctrine of a State veto, upon the laws of the 
Union, carries with it internal evidence of its impracticable 
absurdity, our constitutional history will also afford abun- 
dant proof that it would have been repudiated with indig- 
nation, had it been proposed to form a feature in our Go- 
vernment. 

In our colonial state, although dependent on another 
power, we very early considered ourselves as connected by 
common interest with each other. Leagues were formed 
for common defence, and before the declaration of inde- 
pendence we were known in our aggregate character as 
the united colonies of Jlmerica. That decisive and im- 
portant step was taken jointly. V/e declared ourselves a 
nation by a joint, not by several acts; and when the terms 
of our confederation were reduced to form, it was in that 
of a solemn league of several States, by which they agreed 
that they would, collectirely, form one nstion, for the pur- 



9 

pose of conducting some certain domestic concerns, and 
all foreign relations. In the instrument forming that U- 
nion, is found an article which declares that "every State 
shall abide by the determinations of Congress, on all ques- 
tions which by that confederation should be submitted to 
them." 

Under the confederation, then, no State could legally 
annul a decision of the Congress, or refuse to submit to 
its execution; but no provision was made to enforce these 
decisions. Congress made requisitions, but they were not 
complied with. The Governinent could not operate on in- 
dividuals. They had no Judiciary, no means of collecting 
revenue. 

But the defects of the confederation need not be detail- 
ed. Under its operation, we could scarcely be called a na- 
tion. We had neither prosperity at home, nor considera- 
tion abroad. This state of things could not be endured, 
and our present happy Constitution was formed; but form- 
ed in vain if this fatal doctrine prevails. It was formed 
for important objects, that are announced in the preamble, 
made in the name and by the authority of the people of the 
U. S., whose delegates framed, and whose conventions ap- 
proved it. The most important among these objects, that 
which is placed first in rank, on which all the others rest, is, 
"^0 form a more perfect Union.'''' Now, is it possible that, 
even if there were no express provisions giving supremacy 
to the Constitution and laws of the United States over 
those of the States, it can be conceived, that an instrument 
made for the purpose of '■^forrain.g a more perfect Union'^ 
than that of tlie confederation, could be so constructed by 
the assembled wisdom of our country as to substitute for 
that confederation a form of government dependent for its 
existence on the local interest, the party spirit of a State,- 
or of a prevailing faction in a State? Every mart of plain 
unsophisticated understanding, who hears the question, 
will give such an answer as will preserve the Union.- Me- 
taphysical subtlety, in pursuit of an impracticable theory, 
could alone have devised one that is calculated to des- 
troy it. 

I consider, then, the power to annul a law of the United 
States, assumed by one State, incompatible with the exis- 
tence of the Union, contradicted expressly by the letter of 
the Constitution, unauthorized by its spirit, inconsistent 
with every principle on which it was founded,and destruc- 
tive of the great object for which it was formed, 
2 



10 

After this general view of the leading principle, we must 
examine the particular application of it which is made in 
the ordinance. 

The preamble rests its justification on these grounds: It 
assumes as a fact, that the obnoxious laws, although they 
purport to be laws for raising revenue, were, in reality, in- 
tended for the protection of manufactures, which purpose 
it asserts to be unconstitutional; that the operation of these 
laws is unequal; that the amount raised by them is greater 
than is required by the wants of the Government; and, 
finally, that the proceeds are to be applied to objects unau- 
thorized by the Constitution. These are the only causes 
alledged to justify an open opposition to the laws of the 
country, and a threat of seceding from the Union, if any at- 
tempt should be made to enforce then;. She first virtually 
acknowledges that the law in question was passed under a 
power expressly given by the Constitution to lay and collect 
imposts, but its constitutionality is drawn in question from 
the motives of those who passed it. However apparent 
this purpose may be in the present case, nothing can be 
more dangerous than to admit the position that an uncon- 
stitutional purpose, entertained by the members who assent 
to a law enacted under a constitutional power, shall make 
that law void; for how is that purpose to be ascertained? — 
Who is to make the scrutiny? How often may bad pur- 
poses be falsely imputed? In how many cases are they 
concealed by false profession? In how many is no declar- 
ation of motive made? Admit this doctrine, and you give 
to the States an uncontrolled right to decide; and every 
law may be annulled under this pretext. If, therefore, the 
absurd and dangerous doctrine should be admitted that a 
State mny annul an unconstitutional law, or one that it 
deems such, it will not apply to the present case. 

The next objection is, that the law's in question operate 
unequally. This objection may be made with truth to every 
law that hcs been or can be passed. The wisdom of man 
never yet contrived a system of taxation that would operate 
with perfect equality. If the unequal operation of a law 
makes it unconstitutional, and if all laws of that descrip- 
tion maybe abrogated by any State for that cause, then in- 
deed is the Federal Constitution unworthy of the slightest 
effort fur its preservation. We have hitherto relied on it as 
the perpetual bond of our Union. We have received it as 
the work of the assembled wisdom of the nation. We have 



11 

trusted to it as to the sheet anchor of our safety, in the stormy 
times of conflict with a foreign or domestic foe. We have look- 
ed to it with sacred awe, as the palladium of our liberties; 
and, with all the solemnities of religion, have pledged to 
each other our lives and fortunes here, and our hopes of 
happiness hereafter, in its defence and support. Were we 
mistaken, my countrymen, in attaching this importance to 
the Constitution of our country? Was our devotion paid 
to the wretched, inefficient, clumsy contrivance, which this 
new doctrine would make it? Did we pledge ourselves to 
the support of an airy nothing — a bubble, that must be 
blown away by the first breath of disaffection? Was this 
self-destroying, visionary theory, the work of the profound 
statesmen, the exalted patriots, to whom the task of consti- 
tutional reform was entrusted? Did the name of Washing- 
ton sanction, did the States deliberately ratify such an an- 
omaly in the history of fundamental legislation? No. We 
were not mistaken! The letter of this great instrument is 
free from this radical fault; its language directly contradicts 
the imputation: its spirit — its evident intent — contradicts it. 
No; we did not err! Our Constitution does not contain the 
absurdity of giving pOwer to make laws, and another power 
to resist them. 

The sages, whose memory will always be reverenced, have 
given us a practical, and, as they hoped, a permanent con- 
stitutional compact. The Father of his country did not 
affix his revered name to so palpable an absurdity. Nor 
did the States when they severally ratified it, do so under 
the impression that a veto on the laws of the United States 
was reserved to them, or that they could exercise it by im- 
plication. Search the debates in all their Conventions — 
examine the speeches of the most zealous opposers of Fe- 
deral authority — look at the amendments that were pro- 
posed. They are all silent — not a syllable uttered, not a 
Tote given, not a motion made to correct the explicit su- 
premacy given to the laws of the Union over those of the 
States — or to show that implication, as is now contended, 
could defeat it. No, we have not erred! The Constitu- 
tion is still the object of our reverence, the bond of our 
Union, our defence in danger, the source of our prosperity 
in peace. It shall descend, as we have received it, uncor- 
rupted by sophistical construction, to our posterity; and the 
sacrifices of local interest, of State prejudices, of personal 
animosities, that were made to bring it into existence, will 
again be patriotically offered for its support. 



V2 

The two re.naining objections made by the Ordinance to 
these laws are, that tXe sums intended to be raised by them 
are greater than are required, and that the proceeds will be 
unconstitutionally employed. The Constitution has given 
expressly to Congress the right of raising revenue, and of 
determining the sum the public exigencies will require. — 
The States have no control over the exercise of this right, 
other than that which results from the power of changing 
the representatives who abused it, and thus procure re-r 
dress. Congress may undoubtedly abuse this discretiona- 
ry power, but the same may be said of others with which 
thsy are vested. Yet the discretion must exist somewhere. 
The Constitution has given it to the Representatives of all 
the People, checked by the representatives of the States, 
and by the Executive power. The S. C. construction gives 
it to the Legislature or Convention of a single State, where 
neither the people of the different States nor the State in 
their separate capacity, nor the Chief JNIagistrate elected 
by the people, have any representation. Which is the most 
discreet disposition of the power? I do not ask you, fel- 
low-citizens, which is the Constitutional disposition — that 
instrument speaks a language not to be misunderstood. — 
But if you were assembled in general convention, which 
would you think the safest depository for this discretionary 
power in the last resort. Would you add a clause giving 
to each of the States, or would you sanction the wise pro- 
visions already made by your Constitution? If this should 
be the result of your deliberations, when providing for the 
future, are you, can you — be ready to risk all that we hold 
dear, to establish for a temporary and a local purpose, that 
which you must acknowledge to be destructive, and even 
absurd, as a general provision? Cany out the consequen- 
ces of this right vested in the different States, and you must 
perceive that the crisis your conduct presents at this day 
would recur whenever any law of the United States dis- 
pleased any of the States, and that we should soon cease to 
be a nation. 

The Ordinance, with the same knowledge of the future 
that characterizes a former objection, tells you that the 
proceeds of the tax will be unconstitutionally applied. If 
this could be ascertained with certainty, the objection would, 
with more propriety, be reserved for the law so applying 
the proceeds, but surely cannot be urged against the laws 
levying the duty. 



13 

These are the allegations contained in the Ordinance. — 
Examine them seriously, my fellow citizens — judge for 
yourselves. I appeal to you to determine whether they are 
so clear, so convincing, as to leave no doubt of their cor- 
rectness: and even if you should come to this conclusion, 
how far they, justify the reckless, destructive course, which 
you are directed to pursue. Review these objections, and 
the conclusions drawn from them once more. What are 
they? Every law, then, for raising revenue, according to 
the South CaroHna Ordinance, may be rightfully annulled, 
unless it be so framed as no law ever will or can be framed. 
Congress have a right to pass laws for raising revenue, 
and each State has a right to oppose their execution — two 
rights directly opposed to each other; and yet is this absur- 
dity supposed to be contained in an instrument drawn for 
the express purpose of avoiding collisions between the 
States and the General Government, by an assembly of the 
most enlightened statesmen and purest patriots ever embo- 
died for a similar purpose. 

In vain have these sages declared that Congress shall 
have powder to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts, and 
excise — in vain have they provided that they shall have 
power to pass laws which shall be necessary and proper to 
carry those powers into execution; that those laws and that 
Constitution shall be the "supreme law of the land; and that 
the judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any thing 
in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary not- 
withstanding.'^ In vain have the people of the several 
States solemnly sanctioned these provisions, made them 
their paramount law, and individually sworn to support 
them whenever they were called on to execute any office. 
Vain provisions! ineffectual restrictions! vile profanation of 
oaths! miserable mockery of legislation! If a bare majority 
of the voters in any one State may, on a real or supposed 
knowledge of the intent with which a law has been passed, 
declare themselves free from its operation — say here it 
gives too little, there too much, and operates unequally — 
here it suffers articles to be free that ought to be taxed, 
there it taxes those that ought to be free — in this case the 
proceeds are intended to be applied to purposes which we 
do not approve, in that the amount raised is more than is 
wanted. Congress, it is true, are invested by the Consti- 
tution, with the right of deciding these questions, according 
to their sound discretion. Congress is composed of the 
Representatives of all the States and all the people of the 



14 

States; but WE, part of the people of one State, to whom 
the Constitution has given no power on the subject, from 
whom it has expressly taken it away; we, who have solemn- 
ly agreed that this Constitution shall be our law — we, most 
of whom have sworn to support it — wc, now abrogate this 
law, and swear, and force others to swear, that it shall not 
be obeyed — and, we do this not because Congress have no 
right to pass such laws — this we do not alledge; but because 
they have passed them with improper views. 

They are unconstitutional from the motives of those who 
passed them, which we can never with certainty know, 
from their unequal operation, although it is impossible 
from the nature of things that they should be equal — and 
from the disposition which we presume may be made of 
their proceeds, although that disposition has not been de- 
clared. This is the plain meaning of the ordinance in re- 
lation to laws which it abrogates for alleged unconstitu- 
tionality. But it does not stop there. It repeals, in ex- 
press term-s, an important part of the Constitution itself, 
and of laws passed to give it effect, w^hich have never been 
alleged to be unconstitutional. The Constitution declares 
that the judicial powers of the United States extend to 
cases arising under the laws of the United States, and that 
such laws, the Constitution, and treaties, shall be paramount 
to the State Constitution and laws. 

The judiciary act prescribes the mode by which the case 
may be brought before a court of the U. States by appeal, 
when a State tribunal shall decide against this provision of 
the Constitution. The Ordinance declares there shall be 
no appeal; makes the State law paramount to the Consti- 
tution of the United States; forces judges and jurors to 
swear they will disregard its provisions; and even makes it 
penal in a suitor to attempt relief by appeal. It further de- 
clares that it shall not be lawful for the authorities of the 
United States, or of that State, to enforce the payment of 
duties imposed by the revenue laws within its limits. 

Here is a law of the United States, not even pretended to 
be imconstitutional, repealed by the authority of a small 
majority of the voters of a single State. Here is a provi- 
sion of the constitution which is solemnly abrogated by the 
same authority. 

On such expositions and reasonings, the ordinance grounds 
not only an assertion of the right to annul the laws of which 
it complains, but to enforce it by a threat of seceding from 
the Union, if any attempt is made to execute them. 



15 

This right to secede is deduced from the, nature of the 
constitution, which, they say, is a compact between the So- 
vereign States, who have preserved their whole sovereignty 
and therefore are subject to no superior; that because they 
made the compact they can break it, when, in their opin- 
ion, it has been departed from by the other States. Fal- 
lacious as this course of reasoning is, it enlists State pride, 
and finds advocates in the honest prejudice of those who 
have not studied the nature of our government sufficiently 
to see the radical error on which it rests. 

The people of the United States formed the constitution, 
acting through the State Legislature in making the com- 
pact, to meet and discuss its provisions, and acting in se- 
parate conventions when they ratified these provisions: but 
the terms used in its construction, show it to be a go- 
vernment in which the people of all the States collectively 
are represented. We are one people in the choice of the 
President and Vice-President. Here the States have na 
other agency than to direct the mode in which the votes 
shall be given. The candidates having the majority of all 
the votes are chosen. The electors of a majority of States 
may have given their votes for one candidate, and yet 
another may be chosen. The people then, and not the 
States, are represented in the Executive branch. 

In the House of Representatives there is this diflference 
that the people of one State do not, as in the case of Presi- 
dent and Vice-President, all vote for the same officers. The 
The people of all the States do not vote for all the mem- 
bers, each State electing only its own Representatives. — 
But this creates no material dislinction. When chosen, 
they are all representatives of ihe United States, not repre- 
sentatives of the particular State from which they come. — 
They are paid by the United States, not by the State, nor 
are they accountable to it for any act done in the perform- 
ance of their legislative functions; and, however they may 
in practice, as it is their duty to do, consult and prefer the 
interests of their particular constituents when they come in 
conflict with any other partial or local interest,yet it is their 
first and highest duty as representatives of the United 
States, to promote the general good. 

The constitution of the United States, then, forms a go- 
vernment, not a league; and whether it be formed by com- 
pact between the states, or in any other manner, its char- 
acter is the same. It is a government in which all the peo- 



16 

pie are represented, which operates directly on the people 
individually, not upon the states; they retained all the pow- 
er they did not grant. But each state having expressly 
parted with so many powers as to constitute jointly with 
the other states a single nation, cannot from that period 
possess any right to secede, because such secession does 
not break a league, but destroys the unity of a nation; and 
any injury to that unity is not only a breach which would 
result from the contravention of a compact, but it is an of- 
fence against the whole Union. To say that any state may 
at pleasure secede from the Union,is to say that the United 
States, are not a nation; because it would be a solecism to 
contend that any part of a nation might dissolve its con- 
nexion with the other parts, to their injury or ruin, without 
committing any offence. 

Secession, like any other revolutionary act, may be mor- 
ally justified by the extremity of oppression, but to call it a 
constitutional right, is confounding the meaning of terms; 
and can only be done through gross error, or to deceive 
those who are willing to assert a right, but would pause be- 
fore they made a revolution, or incur the penalties conse- 
quent on a failure. 

Because the Union was formed by compact, it is said the 
parties to that compact may, when they feel themselves 
aggrieved, depart from it; but tis precisely because it is a 
compact that they cannot. A compact is an agreement or 
binding obligation. It may, by its terms, have a sanction 
or penalty for its breach, or it may not. If it contains no 
sanction, it may be broken with no other consequence than 
moral guilt; if it have a sanction, then the breach incurs the 
designated or implied penalty. A league between inde- 
pendent nations, generally, has no sanction other than a 
moral one: or, if it should contain a penalty, as there is no 
common superior, it cannot be enforced. A government, 
on the contrary, always has a sanction, express or implied; 
and, in our case, it is both necessarily implied and express- 
ly given. An attempt by force of arms to destroy a govern- 
ment, is an offence, by whatever means the constitutional 
compact may have been formed ; and such government has 
the right, by the law of self defence, to pass acts for punish- 
ing the offender, unless that right is modified, restrained or 
resumed, by the constitutional act. In our system, although 
it is modified in the case of tfeason, yet authority is ex- 
pressly given to pass all laws necessary to carry its power 
into effect, and under this grant provision has been made 



17 

for punishing acts which obstruct the due administration of 
the laws. 

It would seem supei-fluous to add any thing to show the 
nature of that Union which connects us; but as erroneous 
opinions on this subject are the foundation of doctrine the 
most destructive to our peace, I must give some further de- 
velopement of my view^s upon this subject. No one, fel- 
low citizens, has a higher reverence for the reserved rights 
of the states, than the Magistrate who now addresses you. 
No one would make greater personal sacrifices, or official 
exertions, to defend them from violation; but equal care 
must be taken to prevent on their part an improper inter- 
ference with, or resumption of, the rights they have vested 
in the nation. The line has not been so distinctly drawn 
as to avoid doubts in some cases of the exercise of power. 
Men of the best intentions and soundest views may differ 
in their construction of some parts of the constitution; but 
there are others on which dispassionate reflection can leave 
no doubt. Of this nature appears to be the assumed right 
of a secession. It rests, as we have seen, on the alleged 
undivided sovereignty of the states, and on their having 
formed in this sovereign capacity a compact which is called 
the constitution, from which, because they made it, they 
have the right to secede. Both of these positions are erro- 
neous, and some of the arguments to prove them so have 
been anticipated. 

The States severally have not retained their entire sove- 
reignty. It has been shown that in becoming parts of a 
nation, not members of a league, they surrendered many of 
their essential parts of sovereignt}\ The right to make 
treaties — declare war — le^J taxes — exercise exclusive judi- 
cial and legislative powers — were all of them functions of 
sovereign power. The States, then, for all these important 
purposes, were no longer sovereign. 1'ne allegience of 
their citizens was transferred, in the first instance, to the 
Government of the United States — they became American 
citizens, and ovred obedience to the Constitution of the 
United States and to laws mnde in conformity with the 
powers vested in Congress. This last position has not 
been, and cannot be denied. How then can that State be 
said to be sovereign and independent, whose citizens ov/e 
obedience to laws not made by it, and whose magistrates 
are sworn to disregard those laws, when they come in con- 
flict with those passed by another? Vv^hat shows conclu- 
sively that the States cannot be said to have reserved and 

3 



IS 

undivided sovereignty is, that they expressly ceded the right 
to punish treason — not treason against their separate pow- 
er — but treason against the United States. Treason is an 
offence against soveueignty, and sovereignty must reside 
with the power to punish it. But the reserved rights of the 
States are not less sacred, because they have for their com- 
mon interest made the General Government the depository 
of these powers. The unity of our political character (as 
has been shown for another purpose) commenced with its 
very existence. Under the Royal Government we had no 
separate charter — our opposition to its oppression began as 
United Colonies. 

We were the United States under the confederation, and 
the name w'as perpetuated, and the Union rendered more 
perfect by the Federal Constitution: In none of these sta- 
ges did we consider ourselves in any other light than as 
forming one nation. Treaties asd alliances were made in 
the name of all. Troops were raised for the joint defence. 
How, then, with all these pioofs that under all changes of 
our position we had, for designated purposes and with de- 
fined powers, created National Governments — how is it, 
that the most perfect of those several modes of union should 
now be considered as a mere league, that may be dissolved 
at pleasurePIt is from an abuse of terms. Compact is used 
as synonymous with league, although the true term is not 
employed, because it would at once show the fallacy of the 
reasoning. 

It would not do to say that our constitution is only a 
league: but it is labored to prove it a compact, (which in 
one sense it is) and then to argue that as a league is a com- 
pact, every compact between nations must of course be a 
league, and that from such an engagement eveiy sovereign 
power has a right to secede. But it has been shown, that 
in this sense the States are not sovereign, and that even if 
they were, and the National Constitution had been founded 
by compact there would be no right in any one State to 
exonerate itself from its operations. 

So obvious are the reasons which forbid this secession, 
that it is necessary only to allude to them. The Union was 
formed for the benefit of all. It was produced by mutual 
sacrifices of interests and opinions. Can those sacrifices 
be recalled? Can the States who magnanimously surren- 
dered their title to the Territories of the West, recall the 
grant? Will the inhabitants of the inland States agree to 
jray the duties that may be imposed without their assent by 



19 

those on the Atlantic or the Gulf for their own benefit? — 
Shall there be a free port in one State, and onerous 
duties in another? No one believes that any right exists 
in a single State to involve all the others in these and 
countless other evils, contrary to the engagements solemnly 
made. Every one must see that the other States, in self- 
defence, m\ist oppose at all hazards. 

These are the alternatives that are presented by the Con- 
vention. A repeal of all the acts for raising revenue, leav- 
ing the Government without the means of support: or an 
acquiescence in the dissolution of our union by the seces- 
sion of one of its members. When the first was proposed, 
it was known that it could not be listened to for a moment. 
It was knov.^n that if force was applied to oppose the execu- 
tion of the laws,, that it must be repelled by force — that 
Congress could not, without involving itself in disgrace and 
the country in ruin, accede to the proposition; and yet, if 
this is not done in a given day, or if any attempt is made to 
execute the laws, the State is by the Ordinance, declared to 
be out of the Union. Themajoi'ity of a Convention assem 
bled for the purpose, have dictated these terms, or rather 
this rejection of all terms, in the name of the people oi 
South Carolina. It is true that the Governor of the State 
speaks of the submission of their grievances to a convention 
of all the States; which he says, they "sincerely and anx- 
iously seek and desire." — Yet this obvious and Constitu- 
tional mode of obtaining the sense of the other States on 
the construction of the federal compact, and amending it, 
if necessary, has never been attempted by those who have 
urged the State on to this destructive measure. The 
State might have proposed the call for a General Conven- 
tion to the other States; and Congress, if a sufficient num- 
ber of them concurred, might have called it. But the first 
Magistrate of South Carolina, when he expressed a hope 
that, "on a review by Congress and the functionaries of the 
General Government of the merits of the controversy" such 
a convention will be accorded to them, must have known 
that neither congress nor any functionary of the General 
Government has authority to call such a convention, unless 
it be demanded by two thirds of the States. 

This sugfTestion,then, is another instance of the reckless 
inattention to the provisions of the Constitution, with 
which this crisis has been hurried on; or the attempt to per- 
suade the people that a constitutional remedy had been 
sought and refused. If the Legislature of South Carolina 



90 

"anxiously desire" a General Convention to consider their 
complaints, why have they not made application lor it in 
the way the constitution points out? — The assertion that 
they "earnestly seek," it is completely negatived by the 
omission. 

This, then, is the position in which we stand. A small 
majority of the citizens of one State in the Union have 
ejected delegates to the state convention: that Conven- 
tion has ordained that all the revenue laws of the United 
States must be repealed, or that they are no longer a mem- 
ber of the Union. The Governor of that State has recom- 
mended to the Legislature the raising of an army to carry 
the secession into efrect, and that he may be empowered to 
give clearances to vessels in the name of the State. No act 
of violent opposition to the law's has yet been committed, 
but such a state of things is hourly apprehended, and it is 
the intent of this instrument to proclaim, not only that the 
duty imposed on m.e by the Constitution "to take care that 
the laws be faithfully executed," shall be performed to the 
extent of the power vested in me by law, or of such other as 
the wisdom of Congress shall devise and entrust to me for 
that purpose; but to v.-arn the citizens of South Carolina, 
who have been deluded into an opposition to the lavrs, of 
the danger they will incur by obedience to the illegal and 
disorganizing ordinance of theConvention — to exhort those 
who have refused to support it to persevere in their determi- 
nation to upheld the Constitu'iion and the laws of their 
country, and to point out to all, the perilous situation into 
which the grod people of that Stcte have been led — and that 
the course thej^ are urged to pursue is one of ruin and dis- . 
grace to the very state whose rights they aiybct to support. 

Fellow citizens of my native State — let m,e not only ad- 
monish you as the first Magistrate of our common country, 
not to incur the penalty of its laws, 1/ut use the influence 
that a f.ither would over his children whom he saw rurhing 
to certain ruin. In that paternn] language, with that paternal 
feeling, let me tell you, my countrymen, that you are delu- 
ded by men v.ho are eiiher deceived themselves, or wish to 
deceive 3 ou. 

Mail, under what pretences ycu have been led on to the 
brink of insurrection and tie; sen, en VvLich }cu stand! — 
Pirst a diminution of the value of your staple commodity, 
lowered by ever prcduciicn in other quarters, and the con- 
sequent diminution in the vrlue of your lands, were the sole 
effect of the tariil^lavNS. The erect of these lav.-s ere ccn- 



21 

fessedlyinjurious,but the evil was greatly exaggerated by 
the unfounded theory you were taught to believe, that its 
burthens were in proportion to your exports, not to your 
consumption ol imported articles. — Your pride was roused 
by the assertion that a submission to those laws was a state 
of vassalage, and that resistance to them was equal, in 
patriotic merit, to the opposition our fathars offered to the 
oppressive laws of Great Britain. You were told that this 
opposition might be peaceable; might be constitutionally 
made; that you might enjoy all the advantages of the Uni- 
on, and bear none of its burthens. 

Eloquent appeals to your passions, to your State pride, 
to your native courage, to your sense of real injury were 
used to prepare you for the period when the mask \\hich 
concealed the hideous features of disunion should be taken 
off. It fell, and you were made to look M'ith complacency 
on objects which, not long since, you would have regarded 
with horror. Look back at llie arts which have brought 
you to this state — look forward to the consequences to 
which it must inevitably lead! Look back to what vras 
first told you as an inducement to enter into this dangerous 
course. The great political truth was repeated to you, 
that you had the revolutionary right of resisting all laws 
that were palpably unconstitutional and intolerably oppres- 
sive — it was added that the right to nullify a law rested on 
the same principle, but that it was a peaceable remedy! — 
This character which was given to it, made you receive, 
with too much confidence the assertions that were made 
of the unconstitutionality of the law, and its oppressive ef- 
fects. I\Iark, my fellow-citizens, that by the admission of 
your leaders, the unconwtitutionality must palpable; or it 
will not justify either resistance or nullification! What is 
the meaning of the word palpable, in the sense in which it 
is here used? — that is apparent to every one: that which no 
man of ordinary intellect v.-ill fail to perceive. Is the un- 
constitutionality of these laws of that description? Let 
those among your leaders who once approved and advoca- 
ted the principle of protective duties, answer the question; 
and let them choose whether they will be considered as in- 
capable, then of perceiving that which must hare been ap- 
parent to every man of common understanding, or as im- 
posing upon }our confidence, and endearoring to mislead 
you now. In either case, they are unsafe guides in the 
perilous path they urge you to tread. Ponder well on this 
circumstance, and you will know how to appreciate the 



39 

exaggerated language they address to you. They a re not 
champions of liberty, emulating the fame of our Revolution- 
ary Fathers; nor are you an oppressed People contending, 
as they repeat to you, against worse than colonial vassal- 
age. You are free members of a flourishing and happy 
Union. There is no settled design to oppress you. 

I have urged you to look back to the means that were 
used to hurjy you on to the position you have now assum- 
ed, and forward to the consequences it will produce. Some- 
thing more is necessary. Contemplate the condition of 
that country of which you still form an important part ! — 
Consider its government, uniting in one bond of common 
interest and general protection so many different states, 
giving to all their inhabitants, the proud title of American 
Citizens, protecting their commerce, securing their lite- 
rature, and their arts,K^ciIitating their intercommunication, 
defending their frontiers, and making their name respected 
in the remotest part of the earth! Consider the extent of 
its territory, its increasing and happy population, its ad- 
vances in arls which render life agreeable, and in the 
sciences which elevate the mind! See education spread- 
ing the lights of religion, humanity, and general intbrma- 
tion into every cottage in this wide extent of our territories 
and states. Behold it is the asylum where the wretched 
and the oppressed find a refuge and support! Look on 
this picture of happiness and honor, and say — we, too, are 
citizens of America. Carolina is one of these proud states: 
her arms have cefended, her best blood has cemented this 
happy Union and then add, if you can, without horror and 
remorse, this happy Union we will dissolve — this picture of 
peace and prosperity we will deface; this free intercouse 
we will interru[)t — these fertile fields we will deluge with 
blood — the protection of that glorious flag we renounce; 
the very names of Americans, we discard. And for what, 
mistaken men! — for what do you throw away these inesti- 
mable blessings — for what would you exchange your share 
in the advantages and honor of the Union? For the dream 
of a separate independence — a dream interrupted by blood}' 
conflict with your neighbors and a vile dependence on a 
foreign power. If your leaders could succeed in establishing 
a separation, what would be your situation? Are you united 
at home — are you free from the apprehension of civil dis- 
cord, with all its fearful consequences? Do our neighbor- 
ing republics, everyday suffering some new revolution, or 
contending with some new insurrection; do they excite 



S3 

your envy? But the dictates of a high duty oblige me so 
lemnly to announce that you cannot succeed. 

You have indeed felt the unequal operation of laws 
which may have been unwisely, not unconstitutionally pas- 
sed; but that unequality must necessarily be removed. At 
the very moment when you were madly urged on to the 
unfortunate course you have begun, a change in public 
opinion had commenced. The nearly approaching pay- 
ment of the public debt, and the consequent necessity of a 
diminution of duties, had already produced a considerable 
reduction, and that too on some articles of general con- 
sumption in your state. The importance of this change was 
understood, and you were authoratively told, that no fur- 
ther alleviation of your burthen was to be expected, at the 
very time when the condition of the country imperiously 
demanded such a modification of the duties as should re- 
duce them to a just and equitable scale. But, as if appre- 
hensive of the effect of this change in allaying your dis- 
contents, you were precipitated into the fearful state in 
which you find yourselves. 

The laws of the United States must be executed — I have 
no discretionary power on the subject — my duty is emphat- 
ically pronounced in the constitution. Those who told you 
that you might peaceably prevent their execution, deceived 
you — they could not have been deceived themselves. They 
know that a forcible opposition could alone prevent the 
execution of the laws, and they know that such opposition 
must be repelled. Their object is disunion; but be not 
deceived by names; disunion by armed force is treason. 
Are you really ready to incur its guilt? If you are, on the 
heads of the instigators of the act be the dreadful conse- 
quences — on their heads be the dishonor, but on yours may 
fi.ll the punishment — on your unhappy State will inevitably 
fall all the evils of the conflict you force upon the Govern- 
ment of your country. It cannot accede to the mad pro- 
ject of disunion of which you would be the first victims — 
its first Magistrate cannot if he would, avoid the peform- 
ance of his duty— the consequences must be fearful for you, 
distressing to your fellow citizens here, and to the friends 
of government throughout the w^orld. Its enemies have 
beheld our prosperity with a vexation they could not con- 
ceal — it was a standing refutation of their slavish doctrines, 
and they will point to out discord with the triumph of ma- 
lignant joy. It is yet in our power to disappoint them. 



24 

There is yet time to show that the descendants of the 
Pinckneys, the Sumpters, the Rutledges, and of the thou- 
sand other names which adorn the pages of our revokition- 
ary history, will not abandon that Union to support which 
so many of them fought and bled and died. I adjure you as 
you honor their memory; as you love the cause of freedom, 
to which they dedicated their lives, as you prize the peace 
of your country, the lives of its best citizens, and your own 
fair fame, to retrace your steps. Snatch from the archives 
of your state the disorganizing edict of its convention; bid 
its members to re-assemble and promulgate the decided 
expresions of your will to remain in the path which alone 
can conduct you to safety, prosperity and honor — tell them 
that compared to disunion all odier evils are light, because 
that brings with it an accumulation of all — declare that 
you will never take the field unless the star spangled ban- 
ner of your country shall float over you — that you will not 
be stigmatized when dead, and dishonored and scorned 
while you live, as the authors of the first attack on the con- 
stitution of your country! — Its destroyers you cannot be. 
You may disturb its peace — you may interrupt the course 
of its prosperity — you may cloud its reputation for stability 
— but its tranquility will be restored, its prosperity will 
return, and the stain up its national character wi'l be trans- 
ferred, and remain an eternal blot on the memory of those 
who caused the disorder. 

Fellow-citizens of the United States! The threat of un- 
hallowed disunion — the names of those, once respected, by 
whom it is uttered — the array of military force to support 
it — denotes the approach of a crisis in our affairs on v.-hich 
the continuance of our unexampled prosperity, our political 
existence, and perhaps that of all free government, may 
depend. The conjunction demanded a free, a full and ex- 
plicit enunciation, not only of my intentions, but of my prii - 
ciples of action; and as the claim vras asserted of a right 
by a state to annul the laws of the Union, and even to se- 
cede from it at pleasure, a frank exposition of my opinions 
in relation to the origin and form of our government, and 
the construction I give to the instrument by which it was 
created, seemed to be proper. Having the fullest confi- 
dence in the justness of the legal and constitutional opin- 
ion of my duties which has been expressed, I rely with 
equal confidence on your undivided support in my determina- 
tion to execute the laws; to preserve the Union by all con- 
stitutional means; to arrest, if possible, by moderate but 






.JJ^ 



^5 

firm measures, the necessity of a recourse to force; and if it 
be the will of Heaven that the recurrence of its primeval 
curse on man for the shedding of a brother's blood, should 
fall upon our land, that it be not called down by any offen- 
sive act on the part of the United States. 

Fellow citizens! The momentous case is before you. 
On your undivided support of your government depends 
the decision of the great question it involves, whether your 
sacred Union will be preserved, and the blessings it secures 
to us as one people shall be perpetuated. No one can 
doubt that the unanimity with which that decision will be 
expressed, will be such as to inspire new confidence in re- 
publican institutions and that the prudence, the wisdom, 
and the courage which it will bring to their defence, will 
transmit them unimpaired and invigorated to our children. 

May the Great Ruler of Nations grant that the signal 
blessings with which he has favored ours, may not, by the 
madness of party or personal ambition, be disregarged and 
lost; and may His wise Providence bring those who have 
produced this crisis, to see their folly, before they ieel the 
misery of civil strife; and inspire a returning veneration for 
that Union, which, if we dare to penetrate His designs, he 
has chosen as the only means of attaining the high desti- 
nies to which we may reasonably aspire. 
In testimony whereof, I have caused the Seal of the United 

States to be hereunto affixed, having signed the same 

with my hand. 
Done at the City of Washington this 10th day of December, 

in the year of our Lord, one thousand eight hundred 

and thirty-two, and of the independence of the United 

States the fifty-seventh. 

By the President: 

ANDREW JACKSON, 

£wD. LiVIXGSTOX, 

Secretary of State. 

Mr. McCreery moved the adoption of the following re- 
solutions: 

Resolved by the General Assembly, That a joint select 
committee [the House of Representatives concurring] be 
appointed to contract for the printing of 3000 copies of the 
late Proclamation of the President of the United States, re- 
lative to the Ordinance of S. Cai-olina, on the subject of 
Nullification, for the use of the General Assembly, and that 
4 



S6 

the Governor's Message, and the joint preamble and reso- 
lutions accompany the same. 

Ordered^ That Messrs. McCreery and Snyder, be the 
Committee on the part of the Senate. 

Whereas^ The President of the United States, in his pro- 
clamation of the 10th instant, has exhibited a just view of 
the origin of our free Constitution, and of the powers con- 
fided, by that sacred instrument, to the States and the Gen- 
eral Government: JJnd whereas^ by the said Proclamation, 
the assumed power of a . State to annul a law of Congress 
is conclusively shewn to be "incompatible with the exis- 
tence of the Union, contradicted expressly by the letter of 
the Constitution, unauthorized by its spirit, mconsistent 
with every principle on which it was founded, and destmc- 
tive ot the great object for which it was formed:" And 
whereas, the particular application of this assumed power 
to the alleged grievances of S. Carolina, is most ably and 
unanswerably refuted; and the dangerous and treasonable 
doctrine of the right of secession, combatted by the clearest 
reasoning, is denounced in a spirit of devoted attachment 
to the Union: And whereas, also, the Executive has ex- 
pressed a confident reliance on the undivided support of 
the nation, in his "determination to execute the laws; to pre- 
serve the Union, by all constitutional means; and to arrest, 
if possible, by moderate but firm measures, the necessity of 
a recourse to force." 

Therefore, Resolved by the People of the State of Illinois, 
represented in the General Assembly, That we highly ap- 
prove the sentiments contained in the said Proclamation, 
and the avowed purpose of repelling the unconstitutional 
and dangerous designs announced in the "disorganizing 
edict" of the S. Carolina Convention. 

Resolved, That whilst we admire the firmness that would 
resist "the mad project of disunion," we cordially approve 
the spirit of moderation which deprecates "any offensive 
act on the part of the U. States." 

Resolved, That "disunion by armed force is treason," and 
should be treated as such by the constituted authorities of 
the nation. 

Resolved, That whilst we deplore the spirit of disaffec- 
tion manifested by our S. Carolina brethren, and should hail 
with unmingled satisfaction their return to the first great 
principles of our Union, we hold it to be the duty of every 
citizen of the U. States, without distinction of sect or par- 



«7 

ty, to rally to the support of the great charter of American 
freedom. 

Resolved, That should the pacific invitation, and solemn 
warning of our illustrious President, fail to recal the disaf- 
fected to their duty — should the anti-republican doctrine of 
nullification be persisted in, and treason rear its polluted 
form, within the bosom of our prosperous, patriotic, and 
peaceful Repullic, we do hereby instruct our Senators in 
Congress, and request our Representatives, to unite in the 
most speedy and vigorous measures on the part of the Gen- 
eral Government, for the preservation of the peace, integ- 
rity and honor of the Union. And we do hereby solemnly 
pledge the faith of our State in support of the administra- 
tion of the laws and Constitution of our beloved country. 

Resolved, That a copy of the foregoing resolutions be 
transmitted to the President of the United States, to the 
heads of the several Departments at Washington, and to 
our Senators and Representatives in Congress. 

The foregoing resolutions were unanimously adopted 
by the Senate. 

JESSE B. THOMAS, 
Secretary of the Senate. 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 







.. Illlilllllilllllilll 

011 899 091 2 11 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



011 899 091 2 ll 



f^^5t»m*1ift5-. 



